Early in Moses Deuteronomy speech, he talks
of the covenant made at Sinai or Horeb.

"2The LORD our God
made a covenant with us in Horeb" (Deu 5:2). Moses knew that was historical fact.
Then Moses says in vs. 3,"
3TheLORD did not make this covenant with our fathers, but with us, those who
are here today, all of us who are alive."

There are a wide variety of opinions as to what Moses is saying
here. The confusion arises, because traditional Christianity does not recognize
that one doesn't change a covenant (Gal 3:15) and this covenant made in
Deuteronomy is a second covenant between God and Israel, a deutero
(second) nomos (law).

To begin to understand let's read Deuteronomy 29:10-15. "10 All of you stand today before the LORD your God:... 12that you may enter into covenant with the
LORD your God, and into His oath, which the LORD your God makes with you
today,...14I make this (zo'th) covenant and this oath, not with you alone, 15but with him
who stands here with us today before the LORD our God...".

The whole purpose for Moses speech to Israel in Deuteronomy was to
confirm another covenant. Now read Deuteronomy 5:2-4 again with a slight
change in punctuation.

"2The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. (3The LORD did not make this [zo'th] covenant
with our fathers, but with us, those who are here today, all of us who are
alive.) 4The LORD talked with you face to
face on the mountain from the midst of the fire."

God made a covenant with Israel in Horeb.
However, this covenant, that Moses was speaking at the time -
Deuteronomy, is not the covenant He made at Horeb or
with their Fathers. This covenant was distinct,
and began with those alive at the time of Moses speaking. At Sinai the
Lord spoke directly to Israel. Moses stood between them as a messenger
to declare the word of God after they became
frightened.
Now he is doing that again with 'this'
covenant. This
designation, (zo'th) is the same in Deuteronomy
5:3, 29:9, 14 and even
II Kings 23:3. It is making a distinction between
the covenant Moses is making
the day he spoke Deuteronomy and the covenant that
was made at Sinai or Horeb.

Israel was already familiar with the Covenant of the Lord. On the other hand, 'this
covenant', with 'these words' written in 'this book', which summarized 'this
law',
was distinct from any covenant they had known in the
past.

Actually there is another Hebrew word ('eth) that is not
translated that stands before zo'th in Deuteronomy 5:3. It is
generally, "used to point out more definitely the object of a verb... as
such unrepresented in English," (The Complete Word Study of the Old
Testament). It was not translated because it is used to definitively
indicate the object of the verb. (English has no direct equivalent.
This is usually a built in function of English.) In this case it
eliminates confusion between the covenant made
at Horeb and 'this covenant' made as
Moses speaks. Its intent is to differentiate the Horeb covenant just mentioned and 'this'
covenant. This indicates positively that Moses is making a distinction
between the covenant made at Sinai and the covenant that he is now making with
Israel in Moab.

We should closely examine who Moses is referring to when he talks of
"fathers" in Deuteronomy. It is generally believed that as of
Deuteronomy 1 only Moses, Joshua & Caleb were still alive of those of age
when the Sinai covenant was made. Everyone over 20, legal age, at Sinai
was dead, (Num 14:29). So certainly the great bulk of those of legal age
with whom the Sinai covenant had been made were dead.

If this is the case it is somewhat odd that Moses would say, "2The LORD our God made a covenant
with us in Horeb". Moses also uses similar terms in
Deuteronomy 1:6, "The Lord our God spoke to us in Horeb, saying: 'You have dwelt long enough at this mountain.'"
Then in Deuteronomy 11:2 he says, "Know today that I do not speak with your children, who have not known and
who have not seen the chastening of the Lord your God, His greatness and His
mighty hand and His outstretched arm... 7 but your eyes have seen every great act of the Lord which He did."

In spite of the death of the evil generation, those with whom Moses was
speaking were old enough to have seen and remember the great deliverance from
Egypt and the speech of God on Horeb. They were
a very real party to that covenant. So why did Moses mention the evil
generation, their immediate fathers who had also been a party to the Horeb covenant?
"2The LORD our God made a covenant with us in Horeb. 3The LORD did not make this (zo'th) covenant with our fathers "

Evidently that was not Moses intent at all. "Surely not one of these men
of this evil generation shall see that good land of which I swore to give your
fathers" (Deu 1:35) "And
because He loved your fathers, therefore He chose their descendants after them;
and He brought you out of Egypt with His Presence, with His mighty power."
(Deu 4:37) Here about 15 verses before
Deuteronomy 5:3 it is evident in using 'fathers', Moses is referring to the
patriarchs, not the evil generation. This is also the case in Deuteronomy
6:10, "And it shall be, when the Lord your God brings you into the land of
which He swore to your fathers, to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob..."

Deuteronomy 8:1-3 is also important to verify Moses meaning when he
refers to the 'fathers' in Deuteronomy.
"Every commandment which I command you today
you must be careful to observe, that you may live and multiply, and go in and
possess the land which the Lord swore to your fathers... So he humbled you,
allowed you to hunger, and fed you with manna which you did not know nor did
your fathers know..." Verse 16 connects again
the fathers and manna. "who fed you in the wilderness with manna, which your fathers did not know..."

It is those same fathers,
the patriarchs, which Moses intends in verse 18.
"And
you shall remember the Lord your God,
for it is He who gives you the power to
get wealth, that He may establish His covenant which He swore to your fathers, as it is this day." The covenant between God
and the patriarchs was His covenant, the covenant of the Lord, because, "So
he declared to you His covenant which He commanded you to perform, that is, the
Ten Commandments..." (Deu
4:13)

So yes, the Lord made a covenant with the children of Israel in Horeb, His covenant, but this (zo'th)
covenant that day was not made with the patriarchs like the Horeb
covenant was made.

David seems well aware of the continuity of His covenant. 1Chronicles
16:15-17 gives a nutshell summary of the highlights of His covenant.

"Remember His covenant always,
The word which He commanded to a thousand generations, the covenant
which He made with Abraham, and His oath to Isaac, and confirmed it to Jacob for a statute, to
Israel for an everlasting covenant."

On the surface it was a promise of nationhood. Underneath it
guaranteed blessings forever. (Ps 111:5, 9, 10 see also 105:8-10)

Abraham is held up as an example to New Testament Christians. Did Abraham
keep the covenant as recorded in Exodus 20-23? There is no specific
mention of Abraham keeping the Sabbath, for instance. Since he walked with God
before the Sinai covenant, how could he know the regulations of the Sinai
covenant?

Genesis 26:5 says Abraham kept the Creator’s laws,
"My laws", yet many stipulations of 'the law' he could not have
kept. He never paid tithes to Levi nor did any Levite officiate at any
sacrifice of his. But he kept "My Laws". So God does not
directly equate 'His Laws' with the Law of Moses.

However, he does equate His Law with His Covenant. "Set the trumpet to your
mouth! He shall come like an eagle against the house of the LORD, Because they
have transgressed My covenant And rebelled against My law."
(Hosea 8:1) Hebrew speakers like to repeat themselves
for emphasis, using different words to say the same thing. This
proclivity is alive and well in Hosea 8:1. It is equating My covenant
with My law.

"They did not keep the covenant of God; they
refused to walk in His law" (Ps 78:10).
This verse is doing the same thing. The bulk of the context of Psalms 78
discusses events that happened in the wilderness before the confirming of
the law in Deuteronomy. The covenant and the law that was in force during
that time was His covenant, the Covenant of the Lord and His law, the Law of
God. (see also vs 37, 56)

“And the LORD said to Moses,
"How long do you refuse to keep My commandments and My laws?” (Ex
16:28)This is also equating His Law
with His commandments, His covenant.Remember, Moses is primarily writing to those alive in the
wilderness.They knew what His commandments
were.Certainly the adults heard Him
speak them themselves.

God gave His Covenant to Abraham.
"And I will establish my covenant between me
and thee and thy seed after thee in their generations for an everlasting
covenant, to be a God unto thee, and to thy seed after thee"(Gen 17:7). Indeed His covenant
was established with Abraham's seed as well as Abraham himself. Clearly
He established His Covenant with Israel at Sinai. However, many think the
covenant made with Abraham was circumcision, not the Ten Commandments
instructed at Sinai. This belief comes from Genesis 17:10.

Genesis 17:10 seems to indicate that 'My covenant' was circumcision and
that was the covenant God made with Abraham.
"10This is My covenant which you shall keep,
between Me and you and your descendants after you: Every male child among you
shall be circumcised". This was long before the
Sinai covenant, and this verse probably always reads similar to this in all
English translations. So how can 'My covenant'
here, indicate the same thing as the words of the covenant in Exodus?

The reason this verse is consistently translated this way, is because of
'accent marks' in the Hebrew text. However, they were not part of the
original text. Nor were the accents added to help with proper
understanding of the text. They were added about 700 AD/CE.
Their purpose was to help with the rhythm and/or song of the Masoretic synagogue liturgy as it stood at that time.
So there is no inspired authority for Hebrew accent marks at all. (See, A
short History of the Hebrew Text of the Old Testament by T.H.Weir)

Something else to consider is that there is no present tense 'to be' in
ancient Hebrew. So there is no word for 'is'. There were few vowels
and no punctuation. Sentences were not clearly defined by periods or even
spaces as in English today. The Hebrews determined what word was written
based heavily on context. The words in Genesis 17:10 appear to be; 'this My covenant which shall keep between Me and you and your
descendents after you every male child ...'.

Verse 11 says, "and you shall be circumcised in the flesh of your foreskins, and it
shall be a sign of the covenant between Me and you".
Circumcision was a sign or token of the covenant with Abraham. It was the
outward indicator that Abraham was compliant with His covenant. It was
not the entire covenant. So saying 'This is My covenant ...every male
child shall be circumcised', is probably not what the author intended.
This would be something of a contradiction right in the immediate
context. It is not logical to think circumcision could be both a sign of
the covenant and the entire covenant too.

There are two other places 'is' could be placed and make English sense of
Genesis 17:10. 'This, My covenant, which (ye) shall keep is
between me and you ....." or "This, My covenant, is what
(ye/we) shall keep between me and you .....".
Personally I prefer the former, but since this is of Hebrew origin, the author
probably intended both. This, My covenant is to be kept, and it is
between Me and you and your descendents. Either way that is a complete
thought and marks the end of a sentence. The next sentence would then
read, 'Every male among you shall be circumcised.' This is another
complete thought and complete sentence. Circumcision was a significant
part of Abraham's covenant. It was the token or sign of the covenant, but
it was not the covenant itself. For whatever reason, God chose to put a
different stamp, seal or sign on 'His covenant', in Genesis 17 than in Exodus
20-23.

"5Because Abraham obeyed My voice
and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and My laws", (Gen 26:5). Certainly more than just
circumcision is indicated here. It only makes sense that Abraham
kept the same 'My covenant' that God gave at Sinai. The Sinai covenant
then was more than likely a renewal of the original covenant that God cut with
Abraham in Genesis 15. Verse 17 describes God walking between the
sacrificed animals as a symbol of His acceptance of the blood covenant.
Later the children of Israel had blood sprinkled on them to graphically
illustrate their acceptance and participation.

Isaac also participated in this covenant."And God said, Sarah thy wife
shall bear thee a son indeed; and thou shalt call his name Isaac: and I will establish my covenant with him for an
everlasting covenant, [and] with his seed after him"(Gen 17:19). When God started
moving to free Israel from Egypt, it was because of His Covenant. "And
God heard their groaning, and God remembered his covenant with Abraham, with
Isaac, and with Jacob. (Ex. 2:24). Yet some think
that a short time later, possibly within a year, at Sinai 'His covenant' had
changed.

Now before we get too far, you may be thinking, HHHmmmm,
"'This, My covenant', haven't I seen that before?" Well, yes
and no. Here (Gen 17:10) as well, 'this' is zo'th. Here
again it is used as a demonstrative pronoun to distinguish it from any other
covenant. This is another reason why, 'this
covenant' in Deuteronomy 5:3, 29:9 & 14 is distinct from 'My
covenant'. Moses is using these designations as formal titles and the
titles are not the same.

'This, My Covenant' was set from at least Genesis 15. The full
terms weren't detailed for us until Exodus 20. It was further clarified
for ancient Israel with the inclusion of numerous judgments (Ex 21-23). 'This covenant'
(Deut 29:9), on the other hand, was for those alive at the time Moses gave his
final instruction to Israel before they went into the Promised Land (Deut
11:2,7, 12:1,5,8, 33:51).

What is really important is My Covenant. It was alone in the Ark of
the Covenant. God frequently refers specifically to that covenant.
That is the covenant God really wants obeyed. Abraham was blessed because
he obeyed 'My Laws', which supports 'My Covenant'.

Because all the terms are not detailed for us here in Genesis does not
indicate hundreds of years passing before the patriarchs were made aware of the
terms. The men that appeared to Abraham, one of whom the scriptures
indicate was the Creator, undoubtedly had extensive conversations in their
meetings with Abraham. When it came time to destroy Sodom, He wanted to
let Abraham know what He was about to do.
'And the Lord said, "Shall I hide from
Abraham what I am doing, since Abraham shall surely become a great and mighty
nation..."' (Gen 18:17-18a). Would God consult
with Abraham about Sodom, but not the covenant to which Abraham was
agreeing? Abraham knew the terms. Moses just didn't bother to
record them in Genesis.

If we believe Deuteronomy 31:9, 24, John 1:17 and 7:19 we have to believe
Moses wrote or at least compiled Genesis & Exodus. "Remember
the Law of Moses, My servant, which I commanded him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and judgments."
(Mal 4:4) Generally speaking the law, Genesis through Deuteronomy, was
given to Moses while Israel was camped near Horeb or
Sinai. Remember that God probably spoke His Law, the Ten Commandments, within 14 daysof Israel's
arrival at Sinai. Yet the nation was camped there for almost a
year. So Genesis was undoubtedly written after Israel had learned
firsthand exactly what the covenant of the Lord was. They knew what His
covenant was. There was no great need to include the terms in Genesis.
Certainly Exodus was written before Leviticus, Numbers or
Deuteronomy. They all would have been written within a few years of each
other probably one right after the other. Did the meaning of "My
Covenant" change in that time?

The leadership of Israel knew in detail the terms of 'My covenant' before
Exodus 20 (Ex 19:5-8). They apparently knew before they even left
Egypt (Ex 16:28). Whether the terms were detailed for following
generations in Genesis or in Exodus is irrelevant. At that point it was
known history. All these books were written while Israel was in the
wilderness. All were written to the same audience by the same
author at about the same time. Abraham was a participant in "My
Covenant" (Gen 17:10), and he kept 'My laws' (Gen 26:5). Moses,
Joshua and the children of Israel when reading Genesis would have understood
this as the Covenant of the Lord. The same covenant and law they heard
God speak at Sinai.

Joshua and Israel would also have understood, "My Covenant" as
spoken by the Creator (Gen 17:10), to be the same as, "His
Covenant" as spoken by Moses (Deut 4:13). There was no need for
Moses to totally repeat the terms of "My Covenant" in Genesis.

Even if Genesis wasn't available until Moses spoke the words of the Moab
covenant, many were still alive who had been old enough to understand what
happened at Mt. Sinai. How could the people not know what the words of
God's covenant were? Many had heard God speak the words Himself.
They knew what God's covenant was. Posterity would have the account in
Exodus 20 and Deuteronomy 5. There was no need to include it in Genesis
unless there had been a significant change.

However, since circumcision was not specifically mentioned in the Sinai
covenant (Ex 20-23), it was emphasized in Genesis. All the Israelite
males were circumcised before Israel left Egypt (Ex 12:44-48). For His
own reasons the Creator chose not to include that stipulation in the Sinai
covenant. He chose a different sign or token at Sinai. More than
likely the reason was that He was looking forward to the time when he would
pour out his spirit on all peoples, not just the children of Abraham.

It could even be that He was hoping Israel would embrace His covenant in
truth. In that case circumcision of the flesh would have been irrelevant
if their hearts were circumcised. Indeed none of the young males born in
the wilderness were circumcised. This didn't seem to upset God in the
least (Jos 5:2-5). Contrast this with Exodus
16:27-28 where some in Israel ignored the Sabbath, even before the Sinai
covenant was confirmed. Clearly there is little concern shown about
Israel forgoing circumcision in their forty years of wandering. It isn't
part of the Sinai covenant, the law of God.

It was typical for an ancient Mid-eastern covenant to include a provision
specifying some identifying sign, seal or token. This provision was often
included towards the middle of the legal terms of the covenant. According
to Mr. Klein (author: Treaty of the Great King) the sign of a covenant
was often a suzerain's seal, often stamped with his image. It wasn't
necessarily one of the regulations of the covenant. So a change in the
sign of the covenant would not necessarily mean a change in the terms, or words
of the covenant.

The sign of circumcision was apparently not attached to the covenant with
Abraham at the time it was confirmed. The actual covenant confirmation
took place in Genesis 15. At that time Abraham had no children (Gen
15:2). Abraham was 86 when Ishmael was born (Gen 16:16). Abraham wasn't
circumcised until he was 99 (Gen 17:24). The terms of the covenant had
not changed, God simply requested that Abraham wear a
seal indicating his compliance.

The law God wrote does not require circumcision. However, if you
are a descendent of Abraham and if you are interested in participating in the
physical and national blessings God promised Abraham and his children, you
might reconsider the matter of circumcision. Actually, physical lineage
may not be required (Ex 12:48, Gal 3:29).

Did Abraham then earn the Promises? Certainly not, as Romans 4:3
says. The promises came to Abraham by faith. However he
demonstrated his faith by his obedience. "...
for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your
son..."(Gen 22:12). Abraham
respected God and knew that He would do right in the matter of His request to
sacrifice Isaac. Abraham demonstrated his faith by his actions.

This was not the only example of Abraham's faith. A more down to
earth example is found in Genesis 13:1-11. Here Abraham was the senior of
his nephew Lot. Yet when there was strife he didn't pull rank. He
let Lot chose first, the portion of land where he would live and raise his
herds. Abraham took what was left. He trusted God to work out how
His promise would be fulfilled and made peace with Lot first. Abraham's
actions demonstrate his faith. This is why James says faith without works
is dead, (Jam 2:17). If one doesn't actively use or exercise ones faith,
it accomplishes nothing.

God was not just watching Abraham.
"And you shall remember that the LORD your
God led you all the way these forty years in the wilderness, to humble you and
test you, to know what was in your heart, whether you would keep His
commandments or not." (Deut 8:2.) It seems
apparent God was not totally pleased with their performance.

They didn't obey "And to whom did He swear that they would not enter His rest, but to
those who did not obey?"(Heb.
3:18). Or was it that, they didn't believe? "So we see that they could not
enter in because of unbelief."(Heb 3:19) Hebrews
makes it clear they are one and the same. "Faith
without works is dead"(Jas 2:20).

Another way we know Abraham had faith is, "because
Abraham obeyed my voice and kept My charge, My commandments, My statutes, and
My laws" (Gen 26:5). Generally speaking, if one
is looking out for oneself, one will not naturally choose to keep the intent of
the Law of God. If one is placing his faith in God, one will respect more
the intent of the Law of God and will not be overly concerned about looking out
for oneself.

Did Genesis 26:5 mean something different during Abraham's time than it
did during the time of Moses? Since Moses wrote Genesis it is impossible
that the meaning is different. The time of Genesis 26:5 is the time of
Moses. Genesis was especially written to Moses generation and that
immediately following. These people heard God speak His covenant aloud. (Deu 11:2, 7)

Actually the first mention of a "covenant" appears in Genesis
6:18. Later Jewish tradition calls this the Noahide
covenant and holds that its terms are different than "My covenant" in
Genesis 17, Exodus 19:5 or Deut 4:13. Jewish tradition is certainly worth
consideration. However, based on what Genesis 6 and 9 say there is no
reason to believe that what God expected in the terms of this covenant is any
different than what He expected in His covenant of Deuteronomy 4:13.

"But will I establish my covenant with you" (to Noah, Gen
6:18a). How is that different from "And I
will establish my covenant between me and thee and thy seed after thee"
(to Abraham, Gen 17:7) or "But my covenant I will establish with Isaac,"(to Abraham, Gen 17:21) or "For I will have respect unto you, and make you fruitful, and multiply
you, and establish my covenant with you" (to the
children of Israel, Lev 26:9 KJV). Moses, the author of each of these
quotes defined one covenant of God, "So He declared to you His covenant...the Ten Commandments"
(Deu 4:13). This was undoubtedly done after Genesis
was written since this was spoken just days before Moses died.

Again, Genesis was especially written to the generations immediately
following Moses, most of whom had heard God speak His covenant aloud (Deut
11:2, 7). They had, or should have had, a very solid grip on what God's
covenant was. If the covenant of Genesis 6 or 9 had been some other
covenant it seems it should have been clearly noted. Different terms are
not clearly stated. Some translations make it appear that God is
establishing a new order, but this does not really come from the text, but the
preconceived ideas of the translators. The first readers of Genesis knew
what His covenant was. There was no need to repeat the terms.

Let's think about this a bit. Just before giving His law at Sinai,
God tells Moses if you will obey 'My covenant' then Israel will be a special
treasure (Ex 19:5). Then He speaks the Ten Commandments from the
mountain. Then Moses received the "words of the covenant", the
Ten Commandments (Ex 34:28, also Ex 31:18) on the tablets. Then at about
that time or a short time later God begins to supply Moses with the Law,
including Genesis (Mal 4:4). He tells Moses to quote Him telling Noah, "I will
establish My covenant with you" (Gen 6:18). Then after this is written Moses writes and also
declares unequivocally before all Israel that 'His covenant' is the Ten
Commandments (Deut 4:13). He doesn't qualify it as being only His covenant for
Israel.

It seems Moses came through the experience of writing Genesis convinced
that 'My covenant' in Genesis did not alter or allow some other definition of
what 'My covenant' was. Indeed he specifically defined 'His covenant' in
Deuteronomy 4:13 after writing Genesis. He also repeatedly refers to the
ark of the covenant of the Lord (Num 10:33, Num 14:44, Deut 10:8,
31:9, 25 see also Josh 3-4), which only contained the Ten Commandments at the
time, and he also seems to limit the technical 'words' or legal terms of the
Sinai covenant to the Ten Commandments (Ex 34:28, Deut 5:22, 9:9, 11).

Moses was quite sure what the covenant of the Lord, His Covenant,
was. Knowing God had made 'My Covenant' with Noah didn't change
that. Moses didn't qualify 'His Covenant' as being only the covenant with
Israel.

One point that typically comes up regarding the covenant in Genesis 6
& 9 is that it apparently allowed the consumption of "every moving
thing that liveth" (vs
3a). Of course the covenant of Moab did not allow this (see Deu
14). The Ten Commandments don't specifically say anything about it one
way or the other. However Exodus 22:31ab states, "And you shall be holy men
to Me: you shall not eat any meat which is torn by beasts in the field:.." Leviticus 11:44, which is toward the end of Moses instruction on unclean animals,
has a close connection with this.

"For I am the Lord your
God. You shall therefore sanctify yourselves, and you shall be
holy. Neither shall you defile yourselves with any creeping thing that
creeps on the earth. 45 For I am the Lord who brings you up out of the
land of Egypt, to be your God. You shall be holy, for I am holy."

So because God is who He is, Israel is to keep themselves
holy. "And you shall be to Me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation"(Ex 19:6a). They were also to be
His special representatives. This being the case it seems part of having
no other God's before the true God, means avoiding becoming defiled by eating
unclean foods. "For the LORD your God
walks in the midst of your camp, to deliver you and to give your enemies over to
you; therefore your camp shall be holy: that he may see no unclean thing among
you, and turn away from you" (Deu
23:14). Even though this is not specifically talking of unclean animals
intended for eating, it seems the principle would still apply. God is
somewhat repulsed by unclean things out of place.

So does "Every moving thing that lives
shall be food for you"(Gen 9:3a) indicate that God
was not concerned about whether consumed flesh was all 'clean'?

We need to understand that there are some creatures that simply were not
created for human consumption. The puffer fish, for instance, is very
poisonous and if not prepared very carefully can kill a person in
minutes. Did God tell Noah to freely eat anything that moved with no
concern for its effect? In Japan where people's diets tend to be
more inclusive than in the West, it is illegal to serve this fish in a
restaurant. Too many have died eating it. Is the Japanese
government more noble than God in protecting its
citizens?

We should also remember that Noah knew full well what was clean and what
was not. He was told to bring seven pairs of all clean animals on the ark
(Gen 7:2) and only two pairs of all others (Gen 6:19). So it seems likely
that God was making sure there were sufficient edible animals available for the
new world that would be after the flood.

Also we should remember that Genesis 9:3 says, "Every moving thing that lives
shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs". Not everything that is green is
good for food either. The oleander is a green flowering plant that is
fairly toxic and can kill people if eaten. That being the case if humans
were not warned of this, God
is derelict and guilty according to Exodus 21:28-36. He knew of a danger
yet failed to warn or protect the innocent.

Neither Genesis 1:29 nor Genesis 9:3 designates any and all plants as fit
for consumption. It designates green herbs, which are typically annual
plants having seeds. They typically grow from a seed and die at the end
of the season (Ps 37:2). At creation God designated herbs and fruit from
trees, both of which have seeds, for human consumption (Gen 1:29).
Oleanders and other poisonous plants do not fit into either of these
categories. So God's instruction at creation limited plants that should
be consumed. Likewise we should not be surprised if there is a similar
limitation on animals.

The Sinai covenant does not specifically disallow the eating of swine,
for instance. However based on the quotes above from Exodus 22:31, Lev.
11:44-45 and Exodus 19:6 it seems apparent that He expected the children of
Israel would not eat swine even before the Law of Moses was given.
Leviticus was not a part of the Sinai covenant, but it was assumed to exist by
the Moab covenant. That covenant detailed some expectations of the Law of
God that were not perfectly clear, as a witness against Israel (Deu 31:26). Leviticus 11 is clarifying some of what
it means to be holy which is a requirement of the Sinai covenant.

Some think 1Tim 4:4 indicates that in the New Testament God discarded all
the kosher (clean/unclean food) restrictions.
"For every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanksgiving".
However they don't understand the significance of the next verse, 5 "For it is
sanctified by the word of God and prayer." The "word of God" that Paul is talking
about is the Hebrew scripture. Of course the Hebrew scripture does
not allow every creature for human consumption, certainly not for those
who wish to be holy like God. Paul was assuming that no one who had been
a Christian would eat anything that was not already approved by the Hebrew
scriptures. Paul spoke verse 4 (above) with the prejudice of the Hebrew
scriptures that restricted a God fearing people to eating clean animals.

Just as many jump to the conclusion that Paul
says the food laws are void, so do we jump to an insecure conclusion if we
assume God intended unclean animals to be eaten because of Genesis 9:3.
Because the Sinai covenant did not include a clear stipulation regarding kosher laws does not mean that there was no understanding
on the part of the children of Israel that they were to be holy and eat only
clean animals. Surely Israel must have known if they were going to
fulfill God's intent of having them be His priests to the world. (Ex
19:6). It was simply not clearly recorded for us. We do have the
witness of the Law of Moses, which is a vital consultant regarding the
Law of God.

The Law was added as a witness against Israel. They would not have
the excuse that the covenant of the Lord does not specifically say to eat only
clean animals. The Law made it perfectly clear. Because we can't
necessarily see God's full intent based on the letter of the Sinai covenant
doesn't mean they couldn't have understood. God evidently didn't choose
to tie all details of Genesis 9 into a tidy package either. Genesis 9 seems to
allow eating any animal even though it is perfectly clear that Noah understood
what was clean and what was not.

If one wants to read only Genesis 9 for the letter as opposed to the
spirit one might determine that all animals could be consumed. And since
there is no record that the people were told to avoid unclean meat we must also
assume God never told the people to avoid puffer fish either. In that
case many probably learned the hard way. That being the case God is again
derelict and guilty according to Exodus 21:28-36. He knew of a danger yet
failed to warn or protect the innocent.

It is far more likely that when God promised that He would establish His
covenant with Noah (Gen 6:18, 9:9-12), and six chapters later God promised He
would establish His covenant with Abraham (Gen 15:18, 17:7), that those who
first read Moses words immediately took this to be the Creators' covenant
they heard Him speak themselves. There was no question in their minds
what the terms of that covenant were.

Just in case there was any doubt, Moses recorded God's words in Exodus
19:5 just before God spoke His covenant directly to all Israel from Sinai. "Now
therefore, if you will indeed obey My voice and keep My covenant, then you
shall be a special treasure to me..." In the Law,
Moses left no one with an excuse. "So He
declared to you His covenant, which He commanded you
to perform, that is, the Ten Commandments; and He wrote them on two tablets of
stone." (Deu 4:13).